Rearranging the kinematic equations

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the rearrangement of kinematic equations used in linear motion. Participants explore the derivation of a specific equation related to displacement and velocity, and the algebraic manipulations involved in rearranging these equations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant lists three kinematic equations and questions the derivation of the equation x = x0 + (v^2-u^2)/2a from the second equation v^2 = u^2 + 2as.
  • Another participant points out an algebra error in the rearrangement process and emphasizes the importance of consistent operations on both sides of the equation.
  • Several participants discuss the challenges of algebraic manipulation and the confusion between addition/subtraction and multiplication/division when rearranging equations.
  • A participant expresses a lack of confidence in their algebra skills, attributing difficulties in physics to this issue.
  • There are suggestions for improving algebra skills, focusing on understanding the operations required to isolate variables in equations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the importance of proper algebraic manipulation in understanding kinematic equations, but there is no consensus on the specific steps for rearranging the equations, as some participants provide differing advice on the process.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the terminology used for displacement (s vs. x - x0) may cause confusion, and there are unresolved issues regarding the correct algebraic steps to derive the desired equation.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students struggling with algebra in the context of physics, particularly those learning to manipulate kinematic equations.

BogMonkey
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
The equations for linear motion I've memorized are:
1.) v = u + at
2.) v^2 = u^2 + 2as
3.) s = ut + 1/2(at^2)
v = final velocity, u = initial velocity, a = acceleration, t = time, s = displacement

In an example my physics teacher uses the equation x = x0 + (v^2-u^2)/2a

I'm assuming he derived that from the second equation I listed but I can't figure out why (v^2-u^2) is divided by 2a. When I rearrange that equation I get s = v^2 - y^2 - 2a
Am I just using incorrect algebra or is that a different equation altogether?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
BogMonkey said:
I'm assuming he derived that from the second equation I listed but I can't figure out why (v^2-u^2) is divided by 2a. When I rearrange that equation I get s = v^2 - y^2 - 2a
Show the steps in your derivation.
Am I just using incorrect algebra or is that a different equation altogether?
You are making an algebra error. Also, realize that what is called 's' in one equation is called 'x - x0' in the other.
 
BogMonkey said:
The equations for linear motion I've memorized are:
1.) v = u + at
2.) v^2 = u^2 + 2as
3.) s = ut + 1/2(at^2)
v = final velocity, u = initial velocity, a = acceleration, t = time, s = displacement

In an example my physics teacher uses the equation x = x0 + (v^2-u^2)/2a

I'm assuming he derived that from the second equation I listed but I can't figure out why (v^2-u^2) is divided by 2a. When I rearrange that equation I get s = v^2 - y^2 - 2a
Am I just using incorrect algebra or is that a different equation altogether?

He is. But what you have as s your teacher has apparently called the change in position or delta x, which is really just the final position on a line we might call the x- axis, subtracted by the initial position. He has written final x position as x, and x0 to symbolize initial x position. Knowing this does the algebra now make sense?

oops you apparently realized this now that I look back. you are mixing dividing and multiplying with subtracting and adding in your algebra. This is going to create big problems.
 
Alright here's the steps
v^2 = u^2 + 2as
1.) Moved the v^2 over and got 0 = u^2 - u^2 + 2as
2.) Moved the s and got -s = u^2 - v^2 + 2a
3.) Changed all the signs and got s = v^2 - u^2 - 2a

I never fully learned algebra which seems to be the source of 90% of the problems I have with physics. Like you said pgardn I mix up the addition/subtraction with the multiplication/division when moving things from one side of an equation to the other. Can you recommend a method of knowing exactly how to rearrange equations when you have combinations of addition/subtraction/multiplication/division?
 
Last edited:
BogMonkey said:
Alright here's the steps
v^2 = u^2 + 2as
1.) Moved the v^2 over and got 0 = u^2 - u^2 + 2as
OK. (But better to just move the u^2 to the left.)
2.) Moved the s and got -s = u^2 - v^2 + 2a
No good. You must do the same operation to both sides. On the left, you subtracted 's'; on the right you picked one term and divided it by 's'.

Move the entire '2as' term to the left side.
 
BogMonkey said:
Alright here's the steps
v^2 = u^2 + 2as
1.) Moved the v^2 over and got 0 = u^2 - u^2 + 2as
2.) Moved the s and got -s = u^2 - v^2 + 2a
3.) Changed all the signs and got s = v^2 - u^2 - 2a

I never fully learned algebra which seems to be the source of 90% of the problems I have with physics. Like you said pgardn I mix up the addition/subtraction with the multiplication/division when moving things from one side of an equation to the other. Can you recommend a method of knowing exactly how to rearrange equations when you have combinations of addition/subtraction/multiplication/division?

When you write moved you really have to know whether you are adding/subtracting v. multiplying/dividing in order to isolate some variable. You cannot move the s over like you did(subtracting/multiplying). It has to move with the 2a as well...the whole 2as has to be added to each side...

sorry again, already posted by Dr. Al.

I don't mean to be a downer, but you are really going to have to work on your algebra or this is going to be very tough (as you noted) if your physics class is anything but purely conceptual.
 
Thanks a lot. So it appears its better to look at it like doing the same operation on both sides than moving something from one side of the equation to the other.

Yeah its gotten very tough already. Its basically just this rearranging equations part I have trouble with but that seems to be one of the most essential maths skills to have when it comes to physics so I suppose I better master it.
 
BogMonkey said:
Thanks a lot. So it appears its better to look at it like doing the same operation on both sides than moving something from one side of the equation to the other.

Yeah its gotten very tough already. Its basically just this rearranging equations part I have trouble with but that seems to be one of the most essential maths skills to have when it comes to physics so I suppose I better master it.

At least you understand what you do not understand.

Yes you are manipulating both sides in exactly the same way to isolate one of the variables. Some people have done this so thoroughly that they can perform this very quickly. For those who have not had the practice, practice is in order.

A small sample of what you did...

A = B - CD Read A is equal to B, when B has CxD subtracted from it. So you wanted to get the D as the variable by itself. First you "move" the B to the other side by subtracting B from both sides. Now you have A - B = -(CD) . Second you get the C "moved" by dividing both sides by C. Now you will have A - B all divided by C is equal to - D. Multiply each side by -1... This of course is a long process, but necessary if you have not had a lot of practice.

It is kind of confusing for people just coming back to algebra again with the notation and the rules. Sorry if I oversimplified, but this is basically the same thing you had with your kinematic equation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
865
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K